From: Benoit G. <be...@co...> - 2011-04-20 16:53:50
|
Running libofx and Gnucash from source, I didn't realise that the dirtributions were generally years out of date, so most users were having numerous crashes still with OFX imports (brigning down the entire client application, not just libofx), as well as international caracter issues. Furthermore, distribution-specific patches for which fixes were sometimes integrated upstream years ago were sarting to accumulate. Luckily, Christian moved us to Git (Thanks!), brigning Libofx closer to my usual workflow and tooling. Furthermore a recent laptop upgrade caused me to to use stock package and see first hand how disastrous the situation actually was on Ubuntu, I tried to spend some time sorting out the distro situation. This was the focus of 0.9.4 release. Here's where we stand now: Ubuntu: - At least now the info on https://launchpad.net/libofx is accurate - I created a ppa that always has the latest snapshot directly from git, for Natty and Maverick: https://launchpad.net/~benoitg/+archive/ppa - Natty: I fixed up the packaging (no lint warnings), and sent a merge request for this branch https://code.launchpad.net/~benoitg/ubuntu/natty/libofx/libofx.new-upstream- fix-661809-629996 . However, this close to Natty's release, and without Debian up to date, I'm not sure how much of a chance it has to get merged. Then- again with the Ubuntu patch for https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-jp- improvement/+bug/629996 causing a serious regression you never know. Fedora 15: - Already in testing (thanks Bill!): https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libofx MacOSX: - The maintainer requested changes (Environment variable to define DTD path) to make his life easier, which were implemented. This may also help on Windows. Debian: - As far as I know, all their patches are upstream or obsolete - I'm completely unfamiliar with the process to get an update in (and using their bug tracker in general), but I dit request it at the end of: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=551057 For everyone's general information: -I DO still read libofx-devel regularly -I DO read the bug tracker at https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=61170&atid=496353 and review every patch (if with a pretty long lag time) -To summarize, I do not actively develop the package, and I am not very responsive (this is unlikely to change anytime soon). But if anyone wants to develop (this should be much easier now with git), your patches will NOT fall into a black hole. Thanks for everyone who helped recently! -- Benoit Grégoire, ing., PMP, PSM |
From: Jack <ost...@us...> - 2011-04-21 00:02:35
|
[distribution list trimmed - feel free to forward as appropriate] On 2011.04.20 12:53, Benoit Grégoire wrote: > Running libofx and Gnucash from source, I didn't realise that the > dirtributions were generally years out of date, so most users were > having numerous crashes still with OFX imports (brigning down the > entire client application, not just libofx), as well as international > caracter issues. Furthermore, distribution-specific patches for which > fixes were sometimes integrated upstream years ago were sarting to > accumulate. > > Luckily, Christian moved us to Git (Thanks!), brigning Libofx closer > to my usual workflow and tooling. Furthermore a recent laptop > upgrade caused me to to use stock package and see first hand how > disastrous the situation actually was on Ubuntu, I tried to spend > some time sorting out the distro situation. > > This was the focus of 0.9.4 release. Here's where we stand now: > Trimmed info on Ubuntu, Fedora, MacOSX, Debian Gentoo Linux: Currently at 0.9.1 with an "unstable" ebuild available for 0.9.2 just since March. (I installed it today, but haven't done any testing at all yet.) There appears not to be a current maintainer of libofx for the distro. I'd love to see if I can create an ebuild for 0.9.4, but I don't know if I'll have the time in the near future. Jack |
From: Derek A. <wa...@MI...> - 2011-04-21 15:26:54
|
Benoit, Benoit Grégoire <be...@co...> writes: [snip] > For everyone's general information: > -I DO still read libofx-devel regularly > -I DO read the bug tracker at > https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=61170&atid=496353 and review every > patch (if with a pretty long lag time) > -To summarize, I do not actively develop the package, and I am not very > responsive (this is unlikely to change anytime soon). But if anyone wants to > develop (this should be much easier now with git), your patches will NOT fall > into a black hole. > > Thanks for everyone who helped recently! Glad to hear from you again! Hope all is well. -derek -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH wa...@MI... PGP key available |
From: Micha L. <mi...@de...> - 2011-04-23 12:20:07
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Benoit, I hope I can shade a little bit light on the situation of libofx in Debian. Am 20.04.2011 18:53, schrieb Benoit Grégoire: > Debian: > - As far as I know, all their patches are upstream or obsolete Good to know. :) > - I'm completely unfamiliar with the process to get an update in (and using > their bug tracker in general), but I dit request it at the end of: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=551057 You need to convince a Debian Developer to upload an updated package. Currently Thomas Bushnell is responsible for libofx, but from what I've seen he seems to have last commented on any libofx Bugs more than three years ago, and last uploaded an updated libofx package more than two and a half years ago. So, this is definitely a problem on Debian's side (which also impacts on Ubuntu). I've contacted Thomas Bushnell and asked him whether I can help to improve the situation. By the way: The canonical way to interact with the Debian bug tracker is via mail. To open a new bug, it is most convenient to run any form of reportbug. Regards, Micha -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk2ywF8ACgkQWN0/4pnhQbR2QgCgwq3Ny599DbiogD3hsMLA+mQI y1cAoM1wUJOxoLss1aLhckAKY/sChjpC =Rt5I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |